linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tty tree with the arm64 tree

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 30 Sep 2016 07:44:30 +0200
From:   Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Scott Wood <oss@...error.net>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Aleksey Makarov <aleksey.makarov@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tty tree with the arm64 tree

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 01:38:22PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the tty tree got conflicts in:
> 
>   arch/arm64/Kconfig
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   1d8f51d41fc7 ("arm/arm64: arch_timer: Use archdata to indicate vdso suitability")
> 
> from the arm64 tree and commit:
> 
>   888125a71298 ("ARM64: ACPI: enable ACPI_SPCR_TABLE")
> 
> from the tty tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.

Looks good to me.